Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

RED 18-50mm F2.8 CF LENS Review

C

Charles Adams

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Was there an official/unofficial review of the RED 18-50mm F2.8 CF LENS somewhere? Similar to Evin's Nikon lens reviews? Would appreciate any comments for this lens and not just for optics but for its build and ability to pull focus with.
 
Charles Adams said:
Was there an official/unofficial review of the RED 18-50mm F2.8 CF LENS somewhere? Similar to Evin's Nikon lens reviews? Would appreciate any comments for this lens and not just for optics but for its build and ability to pull focus with.
Click to expand...

Charles,

I'm glad you started this thread. I've been meaning to give my first impressions of the 18-50.

First, let me say that my ONLY experience with it was at Jeremy's open house (Rivetal Rentals). I hung out there for about an hour, checking out the Red and the 18-50, but I mostly played with the lens.

My first impression (coming from an HDV guy), is that it's not really a zoom so much as a variable prime. The zoom difference between 18 and 50 is very minimal, more for making small adjustments to a frame than really being able to enhance a shot or the story with zoom (think Bourne Identity or The Office). There just isn't enough throw to the zoom to use it strategically, at least not for me.

The lens isn't as physically big as it appears in the various stills, because the housing of the lens flares out at the end, whereas the glass does not. It's just a minor detail, but I was a bit surprised. Under the housing, it appears to be more the size of a 35mm SLR lens. The flared housing makes it look more expensive than it really is, which I think is good for the most part.

I noticed some play in the focus ring. Not so much that it can't be worked around, but enough to be annoying.

It focuses incredibly close, which I really like! Jeremy had various minutures (mostly from Spawn, I think) set up on a table. We moved them inches from the front of the lens. At the close range, we could get the forward claws of the miniature to be in focus, and the arm and legs to be out of focus. It was beautiful. There was maybe an inch to an inch and a half difference.

Depth of field was VERY shallow. I've worked a little bit around 35mm cinema glass, but not as hands on as I was able to at the Rivetal Rentals open house. I can tell there will definately be an adjustment period from the DOF of HDV to 35mm cinema DOF. Luckily, I've worked extensively with SLRs and DSLRs, so the learning curve should be quick.

Breathing was visible, but not objectionable to me. I will use this lens for rack focus shots without thinking twice. That being said, some one else at the open house said he wouldn't use it for rack focus shots because it breathed too much. It's really a subjective call. I guess you just have to see it for yourself to determine if it's acceptable or not.

Someone who owns the lens should take some breathing shots and load them up as .mov's. Anyone willing to do this? Maybe at 18, at 50 and half way in between? If no one else had done this by the time I get my camera, I'd be more than willing. Would someone else be willing to host the files?

Overall, I was very impressed with the lens, and I feel that it is a bargain compared to the expense you must go through to make Canon and Nikon lenses work as well as PL mount lenses on the Red.

Red should be calling or emailing any day now (I'm 137), and based on my hands on experience, I plan to purchase both the 18-50, and the 50-150.

I just don't see a better alternative for the money.

-Thor Wixom
 
breathing is no longer an issue in the age of digital post

breathing is no longer an issue in the age of digital post

For my money, i'd rather spend the 5 minutes in post to fix the breathing "if" it makes in the final cut, than the exponential increase in cost for lenses that don't breath. Fixing that in post is so easy.....I can track and scale that in 2 min....why spend the extra 10k+?
 
SunshineTom said:
For my money, i'd rather spend the 5 minutes in post to fix the breathing "if" it makes in the final cut, than the exponential increase in cost for lenses that don't breath. Fixing that in post is so easy.....I can track and scale that in 2 min....why spend the extra 10k+?
Click to expand...

What?
 
Sunshine.. I agree.. For specific shots, for us low-budget indie guys, this will be an easy fix in post-
 
Cinewalt said:
What?
Click to expand...

If that is a request for an explanation I'll give it to you. By slightly scaling the clip in a compositor during the rack, you can compensate for the breathing that way. The trick is to be able to replicate/track the timing of the pull. Its not an "easy fix" if you are really picky though, because its quite hard to exactly match the scaling changes that go on.

I gave it two (or maybe four) minutes in AE and came up with this: http://www.paperbag.no/images/lens_c_28mm_rack_T3_eyeball.mov
This is just eyeballed and isn't good enough for anything but showing you the idea.

If your response was more of a "You can't fix that in post, I've tried", well as I said it all depends on your quality standards.

Cheers,
Fred
 
Hey Blue, I have worked with an old angenuix zoom a few years ago on a big rack that the breathing was so bad that I actually had to incorporate the zoom in the move to hide the large amount of breathing. All that said though even with new cine lenses a zoom will breathe more then a prime and unless its big you can usually hide the breathing.

Matt, I'll try and behave. I just could not resist that pot shot. Actually so everyone knows Matt is really a very stunning man, heck I bet even the Hoff would give him a 9- 9 1/2 out of 10.
 
I'm not sure how fixable it would be -- breathing tends to be hard to design out of a small zoom since most solutions usually involve making the zoom bigger. Or giving it a shorter zoom range or a less close minimal focus.

Fujinon, for example, had a large ENG zoom without breathing problems, but after complaints from shooters that it was too big & heavy, they made a smaller version that breathed more.
 
One thing this is begging for is a breathing comparison with high end zooms i.e zeiss, cooke.
 
david farland said:
One thing this is begging for is a breathing comparison with high end zooms i.e zeiss, cooke.
Click to expand...

Oh yes. That would be pure gold. And at the same time, test matter permitting, one can examine the quality of the various glass. I've a strong feeling theat some will be horrified, if not satisfied, to see the difference between the best (and most expensive) lenses available and RED's relative cheapies.
That last bit of quality in the lens world, the bit that makes up 80% of the cost, comes down to personality. 99% of the audience won't notice it on a cinema screen so it's not their problem but hey it gives the fussiest users something extra to 'focus' on and supports cutting edge research so....
 
For those who have had extensive use with the lens, do you feel it is closer to still or cine lens quality?

The problems with the breathing, focus play and zoom mentioned here actually make it sound more comparable with a still lens.

Paul
 
x0.6 wide angle adapter on the 18-50 RED lens ?

x0.6 wide angle adapter on the 18-50 RED lens ?

Has anybody tried a quality x0.6 (or similar) wide angle adapter on the RED 18-50 lens ? If so, what unit was tested, comments, quality hit, etc ... ?

Can somebody with a RED 18-50 lens post some of it's characteristics ? thread on front of lens, minimum focus at 18mm and 50mm, etc, etc ...

Finally, anybody used a PL mount multiplier with the RED 18-50 lens ? Comments ?

Cheers

PS : the reason for the question ... for underwater usage rather than top side ;-)
 
Thor, thank you for the detailed, thorough response! This is exactly the kind of information and insight I am looking for especially in light of news that the Nikon mount from Red will not be out until early 2008 - yet we will have cameras that should be shipped and received before the end of the year. Trying to determine whether or not they are a good purchase. Thanks again!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top